Posts Tagged with "liberal"

Today, on my way back to my office I happened to catch National Public Radio’s Evening Edition. The story was about a new web reference source in response to Wikipedia. Evidently there are a group of individuals who believe Wikipedia to be too liberal. I am not saying that this group of individuals is wrong, but they came to this conclusion based on the statistics of a poll by Wikipedia editors.

There are several bits of flawed logic with this idea. The assumption that the editors of Wikipedia aren’t human because as a straight set of data this poll would leave no room for human error or a lack of honesty. These facts are statistics. Statistics by nature can be used to sway one way or another. If not lawyers wouldn’t be so profitable. However, the major problem with consevapedia.com, is the misuse of the word conservative.

The main example can be shown by comparing the definitions of the word kangaroo on both sites: Wikipedia and Conservapedia. Okay, I am fine with either of them until I get to the Origins section of the Conservapedia definition. The first thing listed is a creationist theory explanation. That in itself was fishy enough for me to check the dictionary for the definition.

The Oxford dictionary (I would have used Merriam-Webster, but the link wouldn’t pull up) states that a conservative is “(in a political context) favoring free enterprise, private ownership, and socially conservative ideas.” If this is the case then where does interjecting religious beliefs into the origin of a species come into play? A true conservative world should not include religion. Religion is much more defined either one way or another.

Conservapedia.com even goes on to say “A conservative is one who adheres to principles of limited government, personal responsibility and moral virtue.” Where does this give them the right to inteject a secular religious viewpoint, much less stake a claim of moral virtue? If they are truly conservative should they not list the scientific information first?

With that in mind I would like to propose a new web address for this website: severelyscrewypedia.com

If I say “liberal groups,” most people have an idea what I mean. They are groups who adamantly seek reformation in laws regarding their cause, play watchdog to private sector businesses and individuals, and may even have a radical section who choose to reform people by harrassment or violence.
If I say “conservative groups,” most people have an idea what I mean, as well. They are groups who protest change, organize protests, and may even have a radical section who choose to reform people by harrassment or violence.
It is for the latter problem in set of groups why I choose not to align myself with any “group.”

The terms “Liberal” and “Conservative” with regards to political parties came in their interpretations of our Constitution. Liberals believe that the Constitution is dynamic, and that it should be updated. Conservatives believe that the document should be preserved, and that it says what it says.

These terms have little or nothing to do with “Democrat” or “Republican.” Either can be Liberal or Conservative, and even liberal or conversative. There can be conservative Democrats who are Conservatives. There can be liberal Republicans who are Liberals. And any mixture in between.

It’s all twisted. Considering the twists on both sides, polarizing everything just makes it worse.